# Dunhills and Davidoffs



## Sandman (Mar 26, 2006)

What I have been wondering is why don't the cubans just come out with these blends again and name them something else? They were popular way back when, and obviously they are popular now and not just because of the name. Is it because of lack of appropriate leaf, or what? I guess the same can be said for many other long gone cigars. The return of the BGM's got me thinking about this, and they claim that it is the same blend from when they were produced in the 80's.


----------



## Ermo (Jun 3, 2006)

Copyrights is my best guess.


----------



## burninator (Jul 11, 2006)

My guess would be that the issue is at least partially related to Dunhill and Davidoff taking with them the knowledge of the blends when they left Cuba.


----------



## Ermo (Jun 3, 2006)

If that were the case I'm sure Cuba would throw together a good blend and call it a Dunhill or Davidoff.


----------



## burninator (Jul 11, 2006)

Ermo said:


> If that were the case I'm sure Cuba would throw together a good blend and call it a Dunhill or Davidoff.


I think OP is wondering about using the same old blends under a different name, though.


----------



## Blueface (May 28, 2005)

Ermo said:


> Copyrights is my best guess.


Not something Fidel has ever really cared about.

Interesting question posed though. Wonder why they didn't care to violate that patent and use the names.


----------



## JCK (Nov 9, 2006)

My guess is that Dunhill and Davidoff have built a reputation for their products over the years. I would be skeptical of a product that was labelled with their name but not developed under their supervision.


----------



## croatan (Mar 23, 2005)

Blueface said:


> Not something Fidel has ever really cared about.
> 
> Interesting question posed though. Wonder why they didn't care to violate that patent and use the names.


They'd be sued for trademark infringement (and lose) in whatever country they tried to distribute the cigars.

Edit to add: As far as the blends go, the tobacco used now is different than what was grown during that period (at least as to the wrapper, I'm not sure about binder and filler). The Cohiba Linea 1492 Series sort of replaced the Davidoff line, but is a different blend.


----------



## Blueface (May 28, 2005)

croatan said:


> They'd be sued for trademark infringement (and lose) in whatever country they tried to distribute the cigars.


Not if we got rid of all the attorneys.:r


----------



## RJT (Feb 12, 2005)

As far as doing it under the same names as D&D, they could do it and most likley get by with it in Cuba only. They would not be able to ditribute to any other country because of trademark issues. As far as the same blend issue I am not sure they would even have the same blend info that they would need. It is a good question though.


----------



## croatan (Mar 23, 2005)

Blueface said:


> Not if we got rid of all the attorneys.:r


We wouldn't need attorneys if it weren't for insurance companies


----------



## RPB67 (Mar 26, 2005)

Sandman said:


> What I have been wondering is why don't the cubans just come out with these blends again and name them something else? They were popular way back when, and obviously they are popular now and not just because of the name. Is it because of lack of appropriate leaf, or what? I guess the same can be said for many other long gone cigars. The return of the BGM's got me thinking about this, and they claim that it is the same blend from when they were produced in the 80's.


Doesn't everyone want whats in high demand and what is not easily bought.

Collectors and vendors who are sitting on these are making a killing selling these. Plus there will never be another Davidoff or Dunhill unless they go back to making it themselves.


----------



## Sandman (Mar 26, 2006)

I just want to clarify. I'm saying just take the blend and make a different brand, not take the actual name. Like I said they are supposedly remaking the old BGM profile. If they have the ability to remake the old flavor profile of those certainly they can remake the old Dunhill and Davidoff blend.


----------



## raisin (Dec 3, 2005)

I've alway's thought that the Fundidore (with appropriate age) is VERY similiar to a Davidoff #1.


----------



## Bruce (Dec 31, 1999)

hmmmmmmm........................


----------



## Bigwaved (May 20, 2006)

raisin said:


> I've alway's thought that the Fundidore (with appropriate age) is VERY similiar to a Davidoff #1.


Appropriate as in 20+ years or more?


----------



## Ermo (Jun 3, 2006)

Come on Bruce, don't hold out on us with the info


----------



## bonggoy (Mar 9, 2006)

How do you reproduce 20+ yrs of age in cigars?


----------



## lenguamor (Nov 23, 2006)

Sandman said:


> What I have been wondering is why don't the cubans just come out with these blends again and name them something else? They were popular way back when, and obviously they are popular now and not just because of the name. Is it because of lack of appropriate leaf, or what? I guess the same can be said for many other long gone cigars. The return of the BGM's got me thinking about this, and they claim that it is the same blend from when they were produced in the 80's.


If the idea is to have the same blends but name them differently, then how do we know they haven't done it already?


----------



## Sandman (Mar 26, 2006)

bonggoy said:


> How do you reproduce 20+ yrs of age in cigars?


I never said anything of the sort, I was just wondering about replicating the "original" blend.


----------



## Blueface (May 28, 2005)

croatan said:


> We wouldn't need attorneys if it weren't for insurance companies


:r 
Great return on that seve.


----------



## bonggoy (Mar 9, 2006)

Sandman said:


> I never said anything of the sort, I was just wondering about replicating the "original" blend.


Somebody mentioned the siglo series. They were intended to replace some of the Davi lines. Were they the same as the original blend? I don't recall any expert saying they taste the same.

Cuba maybe able to recreate these cigars, but how do you really know? What do you compare them with? Unless you've sampled the davis and dunhills during comparing them with a 20+ yrs vintages. Assuming cuba are able to a vintage cabinetta blend, how will they be 20 years from now? I read somewhere that Davis were really good young and Dunhill's to be less than spectacular. Now, some Dais are apparently past their prime while most dunhill's are in their peak or are still peaking.


----------



## Sandman (Mar 26, 2006)

bonggoy said:


> Somebody mentioned the siglo series. They were intended to replace some of the Davi lines. Were they the same as the original blend? I don't recall any expert saying they taste the same.
> 
> Cuba maybe able to recreate these cigars, but how do you really know? What do you compare them with? Unless you've sampled the davis and dunhills during comparing them with a 20+ yrs vintages. Assuming cuba are able to a vintage cabinetta blend, how will they be 20 years from now? I read somewhere that Davis were really good young and Dunhill's to be less than spectacular. Now, some Dais are apparently past their prime while most dunhill's are in their peak or are still peaking.


Good points. I wonder if there is anyone in Cuba who holds the recipe to these. Anyway it would be interesting to know if they have already done it or if there will ever do it.


----------



## Guest (May 3, 2007)

Not to threadjack, but i was told recently by a vendor (no, not that one! LOL) that Davidoff may once again have a Cuban cigar if/when the administration changes.


----------



## Sean9689 (Nov 9, 2005)

Bruce said:


> hmmmmmmm........................


I figured you forgot this forum existed. :tg No pipes allowed at The Shack...hehehehe.


----------



## mosesbotbol (Sep 21, 2005)

I've mentioned before that it would be awesome if Habanos released some "retro blend" cigars from another era. They would be a high profit margin product for them and one more limited product which they seem to do a lot of these days.


----------



## chibnkr (May 2, 2007)

Sean9689 said:


> I figured you forgot this forum existed. :tg No pipes allowed at The Shack...hehehehe.


LOL. I'd love to see this, but doubt that it will happen. Perhaps post-Castro.


----------



## Baric (Jun 14, 2006)

Sandman said:


> I just want to clarify. I'm saying just take the blend and make a different brand, not take the actual name. Like I said they are supposedly remaking the old BGM profile. If they have the ability to remake the old flavor profile of those certainly they can remake the old Dunhill and Davidoff blend.


I guess the question asked (is it possible to reproduce the original blends) runs parallel with the complaints of many nowadays that many Cuban cigars seem to be losing their distinct tastes (the 'Bolivar' or 'Partagas' taste) nowadays as compared to older productions.

Maybe the answer is they cannot reproduce the old recipes because the stock leaf or soil conditions that went into the blends have changed. Maybe the probles lie one step back from the issue of have they remembered the recipes and even further back from have they got the legal rights - maybe they havn't got the same ingredients anymore?


----------



## Bruce (Dec 31, 1999)

GTS is correct. Davidoff has expressed interest in returning to making their cigars in Havana if and when the political climate changes.
I suspect that if this ever happens, this would probably be the most expensive production cigar coming out of Havana. Davidoff will impose a premium on their Cuban cigars and they will get it!


----------



## MoTheMan (May 24, 2003)

The closest blend to a Davidoff that I've had was a Montecristo Robusto Millinium blend (also a limited production cigar).

I think that while Davidoff & Dunhill own the brand name, and even the special blend used, if Habanos tries to resurrect the brands (hey, they're communist, they can do whatever they want . . . right?), their merchants in Europe & elsewhere will probably face countless lawsuits by the Davidoff & Dunhill people. Just not a risk wotrh taking.

Now I agree w/ Bruce, I've heard quiet a bit of talk about Davidoff being in negotiation w/ Habanos to resurrect the brand. Guess we'll wait & see. :w


----------



## broozer (Mar 23, 2006)

Sandman said:


> What I have been wondering is *why don't the cubans just come out with these blends again and name them something else?* They were popular way back when, and obviously they are popular now and not just because of the name. Is it because of lack of appropriate leaf, or what? I guess the same can be said for many other long gone cigars. The return of the BGM's got me thinking about this, and they claim that it is the same blend from when they were produced in the 80's.


who says they haven't done this already?

bruce


----------



## Sandman (Mar 26, 2006)

broozer said:


> who says they haven't done this already?
> 
> bruce


Exactly! I was hoping someone chime in and let us know the answer.


----------



## ATLHARP (May 3, 2005)

Blueface said:


> Not something Fidel has ever really cared about.
> 
> Interesting question posed though. Wonder why they didn't care to violate that patent and use the names.


Yeah,

What? Castro always honored copyrights. I remember the Aluminum tubes for cigars as a case in point.  What a turd! Like Castro ever sat up nights trying to figure out how to make that threaded cap!

ATL


----------



## Sir Winston (Sep 29, 2006)

MoTheMan said:


> Guess we'll wait & see. :w


Mo, I won't hold my breath. I think this might take some time. :ss


----------

